Hacker News Reader

Comment by pastacacioepepe | Hacker News Reader

"Losing". As if Taiwan and Japan are owned by the USA. The title itself speaks loudly about the mindset of the author and the American ruling class, but reveals also the truth. Taiwan is an ex military dictatorship born as a puppet state for the USA to counter communist China.

View on HN

The term "losing" doesn't have such a specific connotation for me.

E.g., losing a friend to a drunk driver.

I read the article the feeling got was "losing" was used similar to losing a district in an election.

Not ownership of the district, but definitely a decrease of the party's (owned) influence and power due to that districts allegiance.

Another more mundane analogy, a sports team can lose a player in the say way.

Sure, and China used to be a sclerotic caste-based bureaucracy ruled by a hereditary elite. Things change. Taiwan isn't ruled by Chiang Kai-shek anymore; it's a sovereign, democratic society with a flourishing economy and a sense of identity distinctive from that of mainland China.

Chinese society was neither caste-based or ruled by a hereditary elite.

> Taiwan is an ex military dictatorship born as a puppet state for the USA to counter communist China.

It is immaterial what Taiwan was born as. It is a self-governing, free country, and the only thing that matters should be the wishes of the people who live there. And that overwhelmingly is to not be a part of communist China.

It is a self-governing, "free" "country" whose founding political party supports the policy of "one China, two systems," and where recent elections saw China-hostile politicians decimated.

https://www.npr.org/2022/11/26/1139270577/taiwan-election-pr...

edit: What the US is doing with Taiwan is not being done based on consultation with the Taiwanese people. It is not for the Taiwanese.

It's almost as if you didn't read the article you linked, which summarizes, "the elections likely hinged on local issues, not China."

Polls indicate that the Taiwanese overwhelmingly want to either "maintain the status quo" or "maintain the status quo with incremental movement toward independence" (https://esc.nccu.edu.tw/PageDoc/Detail?fid=7801&id=6963), which is entirely what the US policy is intended to support! Like the Taiwanese people, we also don't want an apocalyptic conflict with China when the status quo is already de facto independence, regardless of what we call it to appease nationalist factions in Chinese domestic politics.

> which summarizes, "the elections likely hinged on local issues, not China."

It's almost as if this is NPR's editorial opinion, rather than a fact about Taiwan. I intentionally linked a hostile article.

A pre-election article

"If Not Cross-strait Issues, What Are The 2022 Elections About?"

> CROSS-STRAIT RELATIONS are not the dominant frame of this election cycle. Namely, nine-in-one elections, which serve as midterms between presidential elections, are primarily about local issues rather than cross-strait issues. Cross-strait relations are for Taiwanese, after all, largely a matter of foreign policy.

> As such, it would not surprise if the KMT performed well in this set of elections. The KMT has always had a stronger grip over local politics, seeing as its local clientelist and patronage networks date back to the authoritarian period. As the party that rose out of Taiwan’s democracy movement in past decades–and which may have had two presidents but never controlled the Taiwanese legislature until the first term of the Tsai administration–the DPP is still unable to break the stranglehold of the KMT over local politics.

> However, the key domestic election issues that voters will be voting on return to Taiwan’s economic outlook and its demographic challenges. Taiwan’s economy has seen growth, particularly with regards to exports, due to the minimized effects of COVID-19 after going for more than a year without any lockdowns as the rest of the world saw, and outbreaks that were contained with relative speed when COVID-19 did finally enter Taiwan. But such growth has not trickled down to the population writ large. As such, the issue of stagnant wages is a major issue up for contention.

https://newbloommag.net/2022/11/24/cross-domestic-issues-202...

That is NPR's analysis of the situation, based on expertise, available information, and reliable polling such as that which I linked above. "Opinion" is reading an article, then entirely ignoring its conclusions and supporting data because you think you know better.

Two systems as in Hong Kong? Btw, those were local elections and if you've been reading Taiwanese news sources, you'd find that nobody saw those elections as a referendum on joining China.

Hong Kong was a British colony seized from China by force, and reverted to Chinese governance as scheduled. The idea that China should respect Britain's status quo is laughable.

Sure, I agree. I was only implying that nobody takes the "One-country two-systems" promise seriously. Much less the Taiwanese.

Politics are, as they say, local. The KMT doing well in recent elections are due to a lot of different issues, not necessarily something as abstract and high-minded as the status of the nation. A periodic election is not the same thing as a national referendum.

If only we are consistent in applying this standard. Are Hawaiian, native American, Puerto Rican, Ryuku etc independence activists' wish also important or is only Taiwan's wish important? If only Taiwan, then we do truly believe in this standard or is it just a moral cover for geopolitical interest?

This is kind of a silly comment. Of course the US interest in Taiwan has to do with geopolitical interest rather than a moral standing.

That doesn't stop me (or anyone else) from believing that the Taiwanese should be entitled to self-determination. Or the Hawaiians, Indigenous peoples, or Puerto Ricans for that matter. If support for that aim happens to come from the US then that's fine by me. Moral consistency from a national government is not something I require or expect.

Or Eastern Ukraine for that matter. If there were actually concern about the self-determination of people who lived there, they would have been asked. We don't ask, because we know what the answer would be.

Well they were asked. They voted to be part of an independent Ukraine.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1991_Ukrainian_independence_re...

Should they be asked again? Maybe. But it’s impossible to do fairly at the present time.

Taiwan has been independent in fact for a long time. Changning the status quo seems to require more justification. If large majorities of Taiwanese want to join China than that is their prerogative.

What about Cuba then, can we leave them alone?

Of course they should be. I also believe that democracy is a human right.

I think US policy for Cuba, Israel, and Iran harms consistency.

The vast majority support the status quo[1], which the West is investing billions in interfering with on the military, economic, and political fronts. It’s doing so for its own reasons, not out of any affection for the people of Taiwan (of which it has none).

[1] https://www.taiwannews.com.tw/en/news/4350512

Status quo is being able to run their own country and free-and-fair elections. And besides, the question was asked under the threat of China's automatic invasion if it ever formally declared independence - I suppose people don't want to die.

I agree, people don’t want to die. So absent an outside force stoking antagonisms, they will generally find a way to resolve disputes with their neighbors peacefully.

Correction: I have quite a bit of affection for the people of Taiwan. So there's at least one.

The person you're replying to didn't say that no one has affection for Taiwan. You (likely) have no part in deciding US-China policy.

> The vast majority support the status quo[1], which the West is investing billions in interfering with on the military, economic, and political fronts. It’s doing so for its own reasons, not out of any affection for the people of Taiwan (of which it has none).

I'm part of The West :)

Did you vote on the policies being carried out by Western governments and institutional apparatuses or is it just a coincidence that you have the same opinion on this issue as the people on TV? :)

The opinion being that the independent country of Taiwan should not be attacked by the communist dictatorship of China?

Probably a coincidence.

Wow, how evil! Like a movie villain!

Yea, evil empire and all.. where is Reagan when you need him?!

All such statements have the comical subtext of suggesting Chinese "ownership" of Taiwan would be a better scenario.

Taiwan is part of China. The USA also hypocritically recognize that.

No, the Taiwan Relations Act specifically does NOT recognize that.

It recognizes the CCP's claim to Taiwan as part of China.

Recognizing that Taiwan is part of China is not part of the act, and was deliberately written as such.

There's a vast difference between diplomatically saying "this land is yours" versus "we understand that you claim that this land is yours".

Night and day. The deliberate vagueness was the whole point of the language used in the act.

This suggests that the position of US about of the issue is that "This land is yours" is debatable.

However the majority opinion of western world which is shaped by MSM has another view that "(A) This land is not yours and (B)it's not debatable". They only mention the issue is "debatable" when the position of US official position is against their opinion. Underneath they still believe there's no controversy that Taiwan is not part of China due to their hidden ideology.

Decoding hidden part of people's mind based on their output is more interesting than the original topic and also itself is quite controversial.

"This suggests that the position of US about of the issue is that "This land is yours" is debatable."

Fair point. The wording is intentionally vague and up for interpretation - because as you say, we all know US's opinion is that China is China, and Taiwan is Taiwan, but in order to avoid pissing off China, we keep things as ambiguous and vague as we can.

Strategic obfuscation, if you will.

I wonder how the residents of Taiwan feel about this.

It's good that you ask the question that most of people get information from English media.

Taiwan as many people mentioned here is a democracy. It has freedom of speech. So it's easy to get the information from the source inside Taiwan.

Long story short: It's very mixed. There are people want to re-unit with China and even expect the mainland using military means. Pro-independence group is much larger but majority like to keep the existing status while tend to independence.

Here are some media that show views against Western perception which seems originated from MSM .

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8t6ep7auypk

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xvACcb9qrt4

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0UEz3CyD1ME

There are much more. But again as I mention they are minority

(Claim: I'm not saying that MSM is trusted by Western audience. On the contrary a lot of people especially young generation don't trust or even disdain MSM. However the Taiwan issue is an exception.）

How do the Catalonians feel about being part of Spain, or the russophone Ukrainians about being part of Ukraine? Not great. Do you care? If the answer is no, then what you are concerned about is not Taiwanese independence.

Well, how do the Catalans feel about being part of Spain? Seems like none of the referenda that were held had close to 100% participation, since anti-independence votes boycotted them. Certainly Catalonian nationalism/sovereignty shouldn't be discounted, but is it as comparable as you'd say? Maybe somewhere like Palestine would be a better analogy, as that is also a case where a long-standing autonomous government has actually existed.

A people should have a right to self-determination. I can believe that just fine regardless of which people it's applied to. The current focus is in this discussion is about Taiwan, so naturally discussions about Taiwanese self-determination are going to be the focus in this thread. Maybe we'll get a thread about Catalonia sometime. When that happens we can discuss that. For now, let's bound our conversation to the article topic please, and stop trying to derail discussion with whataboutism.

> let's bound our conversation to the article topic please, and stop trying to derail discussion with whataboutism.

There's been no actual discussion about the self-determination of the Taiwanese, because the Taiwanese have not been asked whether they want to be separated from China, and any indication that they don't has been scrupulously ignored.

Polls are clearly trending in a specific direction.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Opinion_polling_on_Taiwanese_i...

Polls indicating support of the status quo are obviously in response to the threats of war, and doing one's best to avoid it. Support for reunification however has fallen off a cliff.

You mean West Taiwan is part of Taiwan? The legitimate government in exile when the commies took over, I believe.

You should look up what happened to the native Formosans when the "legitimate government" (occupying army) went into exile.

What are native Formosans? The indigenous aboriginal Austronesian people of the island, or the Han and Hakka settlers who arrived from the mainland since the 13th century? And you should look up what happened after that occupying army relaxed martial law and the dictatorship fell away.

By legitimate government you mean those responsible for the White Terror[0] in Taiwan? By all means I'm glad the "commies" took over then.

.0 https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/White_Terror_(Taiwan)

While killing a few thousand protesters is surely bad, it is a drop in the bucket compared to those murdered under the commies. So I am very glad the commies didn't get Taiwan, or it would've been a 100 times worse.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com